Nikon D70 vs Canon 350D

[iJeff]

Click here for a comparison of the two dSLR from digitalreview.ca

[jazzyong]

wow,nice Review!! great job! : D

[billpepsi]

Originally Posted by iJeff Click here for a comparison of the two dSLR from digitalreview.ca

Yeap D70, you have my vote!!!

[ParkertR]

wow wee~ canon's got a nice challenger to the D70. great review thanks for sharing the link!

[nightwolf75]

b4 anyone gets overboard with the praises and condemnation (ie flame war), do read the conclusion again?

"Which camera to choose is a personal one and depends on a number of factors. All things considered, bottom line is that the Canon EOS Rebel XT and the Nikon D70 digital SLR are both capable of delivering excellent image quality. We recommend looking at what features are the most important to you, and to base your decision accordingly."

actually, IMO, the reviewer just did a side-by-side comparison, not a 'recommend to buy which cam' review. excellent idea, i might add, rather than the usual fare of brand-bashings.

[ParkertR]

well said

[billpepsi]

Originally Posted by nightwolf75 b4 anyone gets overboard with the praises and condemnation (ie flame war), do read the conclusion again? actually, IMO, the reviewer just did a side-by-side comparison, not a 'recommend to buy which cam' review. excellent idea, i might add, rather than the usual fare of brand-bashings.

The 350D is actually a hacked version of 300D, but with DIGIC II, 8MP and smaller body. IMHO, I would rather get the cheaper 300D, than to pay $1,999 for the 350D.

As for D70 vs 350D, there is a subtle hint from the author's review that which camera is better. IMHO, both are good camera with similar features, but the biggest difference is the lens kit that comes with the package.

BTW, I was informed that the Canon's lens kit sold outside of Japan is not USM, and also the "II" marking on the lens is cosmetic change. Check this CNET for info.

http://asia.cnet.com/reviews/digital...086513p,00.htm

Before anybody flames me, like to let you know that I am not anti-Canon. Like I said before, both are good cameras. Most important is the person behind the camera.

[mpenza]

either camera is good enough for most users. if 350D was released before the 20D, i'll probably get it (since I've existing Canon equipment).

[s2s1]

Originally Posted by iJeff Click here for a comparison of the two dSLR from digitalreview.ca

Good info!

[yanyewkay]

I love the D70's features and 1.5 crop factor but I prefer 350D's 8mp sensor and iso100 and small size..

Such a headache..

[ortega]

My big hands will prefer the D70, not to mention my old equipment.
I will keep my D70 for at least 3 years before I think of changing.
Unless someone wants to give me a D2X.

[jnet6]

Originally Posted by ortega My big hands will prefer the D70, not to mention my old equipment. I will keep my D70 for at least 3 years before I think of changing. Unless someone wants to give me a D2X.

or maybe a D2h...

[mpenza]

if you want to use wide-angles, for the 350D, u could get the EF-S 10-22 which is lighter, wider and cheaper than the Nikon 12-24 DX, yet probably offering similar image quality.

[yanyewkay]

Originally Posted by mpenza if you want to use wide-angles, for the 350D, u could get the EF-S 10-22 which is lighter, wider and cheaper than the Nikon 12-24 DX, yet probably offering similar image quality.

that's some good food for though.. I was thinking in terms of the wide angles when i compared the 1.5 and 1.6 FLM..

[sabaisabai]

Originally Posted by jeffhiew The 350D is actually a hacked version of 300D, but with DIGIC II, 8MP and smaller body. IMHO, I would rather get the cheaper 300D, than to pay $1,999 for the 350D.

What gives you that impression? The 300D and 350D look to be entirely different cameras to me. The 300D was a crippled version of the 10D, and the 350D may be a cut-down version of the 20D (though not crippled as the 300D was), but it's certainly not a hacked version of the 300D.

Sure you're not anti-Canon?

[billpepsi]

Originally Posted by sabaisabai What gives you that impression? The 300D and 350D look to be entirely different cameras to me. The 300D was a crippled version of the 10D, and the 350D may be a cut-down version of the 20D (though not crippled as the 300D was), but it's certainly not a hacked version of the 300D. Sure you're not anti-Canon?

Don't think I understand your question.

The 350D has all the features enabled (except ISO3200) which were previously crippled in 300D, and I guess the hacked firmware can take care of that but with a display error in the sequence no. Is that a serious problem? I don't know, only the owners of 300D will know. 350D has DIGIC II, 8MP and smaller body (as mentioned in my previous post)

Did my previous post say that the 300D and 350D is indifferent??

IMHO, if tight on budget, the discounted 300D is still a good camera. If have the extra $$ to spend, by all means get the 350D.

[freelancer]

Originally Posted by jeffhiew The 350D has all the features enabled (except ISO3200) which were previously crippled in 300D, and I guess the hacked firmware can take care of that but with a display error in the sequence no. Is that a serious problem? I don't know, only the owners of 300D will know. 350D has DIGIC II, 8MP and smaller body (as mentioned in my previous post)

Canon intentionally put out the 350D to be close to the D70 and it has to do with a lot of product positioning sales pitch. The 350D is not, in my opinion, a cut down version of the 20D. There are a lot more differences between the 350D/20D.

Agree with you that the 350D is the 300D + firmware crippled features in a new packaging - ETTL2, DIGIC II, 8mp (different sensor from 20D by the way)

[yanyewkay]

Originally Posted by jeffhiew The 350D is actually a hacked version of 300D, but with DIGIC II, 8MP and smaller body.

so to quote.. can we say all cameras are hacked/crippled versions of the 1Ds MkII.. only that they have smaller sensors, some features disabled and different bodies, some models "just add a built-in flash", etc,etc,....

From my viewpoint, 350D is a camera by itself. its 8mp sensor was re-designed and is not the same 8.2mp as the 20D even.

Of course you can hack the firmware to obtain ISO3200, x-sync 500(or even 1000 or 2000) the question is. Can the camra handle it? Even if it is able to do so. How long can the sensor last at continuous iso3200.
If you want, you can even hack the power management unit and overclock the Digic processor and get 8fps.

Think I should just stick to my ancient Canon A200 since it's just the person behing the camera that makes the diff. Would have saved me of my life savings.

Not flaming here. Just voicing my opinions. "It's the person behing the camera that counts"

[Peter Lim]

Good investment for L lens, however some of the none L lens perform as good as
the L glass, such as the 50mm f1.4.

[billpepsi]

Originally Posted by yanyewkay so to quote.. can we say all cameras are hacked/crippled versions of the 1Ds MkII.. only that they have smaller sensors, some features disabled and different bodies, some models "just add a built-in flash", etc,etc,....

There are two issues here, the software and hardware. As you mentioned, yes the firmware usually can be hacked for "enhanced" features. But as for hardware, I suspect it has its limits (eg. slower motor) and can't support the load which 1Ds MkII is designed for.